Hate the SPO15 :/

[Pavlin_33]

19 hours ago, Muchocracker said:

Myth. F-X program was active before mig-25 and had solidified the requirements that would end up becoming the F-15 without it even being considered the primary threat by US intelligence. Su-17 was. 

I dunno, Eagle looks awful alot like the 25 in layout, down to almost identical air intakes.

Do you have some references that back up your statement. I would be grateful.

[Pavlin_33]

7 hours ago, Weta43 said:

The point wasn't that the US doesn't or can't use GCI, it's that US planes were designed to be able to operate autonomously WRT target aquisition in the first instance, and could be supported by GCI if available, whereas Soviet aircraft were designed to not work autonomously, but instead be the sharp end of an integrated system starting with EWR systems.

it comes back to the force projection / home defense doctrinal approach mentioned above. 

If the purpose of an aircraft is to fly deep behind enemy lines to attack the enemy at its heart, then the aircraft has to be able to find and prioritise targets itself - if it's in a position where it can be supported by other assets (AWAC / GCI), then of course you do that. Why would you not? (& as you said, if you're tasked with a mission by a central command, that's what you do, not head off at your own whim)

Flying deep into enemy territory was never the intended mission of the MiG-29. Think about how short its legs are.

It really is just there to quickly get missiles to where the GCI intends them to be - which is why there are better radar scan rasters available to GCI operators on the '29's radar than to the pilot themselves...

People seem to think that AWACS and GCI in the real world work like in DCS: an all seing eye that gives you an F10 view of the battlefield.

In '99 NATO agressiom against FR Yugoslavia, USAF pilots found the (British) AWACS next to useless, as it was giving them erroneous reports and, in their words, was making the entire situation more difficult.

Same story on Serbian side with GCI, that was giving reports like: "Blue is comming from the west." No further instructions, no number and type of threat, no height and no speed. Just a one-liner that left the pilots use their imagination and wonder what to do with this information.

 

Edited 7 hours ago by Pavlin_33

[MickV]

While I'm very much enjoying the MiG-29 overall, I fear that the SPO-15 is going to absolutely crater sales - and I say that as a dedicated Redfor guy who very much wants the MiG-29 to sell like hotcakes - so we can get a MiG-23, MiG-25, Su-17/22 etc. 

Having no effective way to detect enemy locks (let alone launches) is going to get real old, real fast for most players. 

[av8orDave]

56 minutes ago, MickV said:

While I'm very much enjoying the MiG-29 overall, I fear that the SPO-15 is going to absolutely crater sales - and I say that as a dedicated Redfor guy who very much wants the MiG-29 to sell like hotcakes - so we can get a MiG-23, MiG-25, Su-17/22 etc. 

Having no effective way to detect enemy locks (let alone launches) is going to get real old, real fast for most players. 

Yeah, I agree. I'm already to the point after having the module for about 24 hours that I'm done getting whacked by SAMs and AAMs. It simply isn't much fun to start up, take off, fly to a mission objective, and get thwacked without ever knowing it was coming. I play Retribution offline almost exclusively, and even with careful mission planning, it just isn't much fun to fly the -29.

[Pavlin_33]

5 minutes ago, av8orDave said:

Yeah, I agree. I'm already to the point after having the module for about 24 hours that I'm done getting whacked by SAMs and AAMs. It simply isn't much fun to start up, take off, fly to a mission objective, and get thwacked without ever knowing it was coming. I play Retribution offline almost exclusively, and even with careful mission planning, it just isn't much fun to fly the -29.

So you get "nails"? If yes, then assume that you are being targeted. If this helps in any way, that is.

[primus_TR]

Even when it works, SPO15 gives too many false and meaningless warnings. It is as useless as the SPO10 (the one used in the Mig21, Mi24) at this time. 

[MickV]

1 hour ago, Pavlin_33 said:

So you get "nails"? If yes, then assume that you are being targeted. If this helps in any way, that is.

"Keep your radar off so you know when to turn 180 and bravely run away towards friendly SAMs until there's no more lock tone" is not a gameplay experience I'm likely to recommend a friend pay $80 USD for.

I very much WANT to get friends to buy this module, but if it ain't fun, they're not going to be buying it. 

[Dača]

3 minutes ago, MickV said:

"Keep your radar off so you know when to turn 180 and bravely run away towards friendly SAMs until there's no more lock tone" is not a gameplay experience I'm likely to recommend a friend pay $80 USD for.

I very much WANT to get friends to buy this module, but if it ain't fun, they're not going to be buying it. 

Every goods have their own buyers. If you like it, buy it. If not, no reason to force anything.

[CrazyGman]

32 minutes ago, MickV said:

"Keep your radar off so you know when to turn 180 and bravely run away towards friendly SAMs until there's no more lock tone" is not a gameplay experience I'm likely to recommend a friend pay $80 USD for.

I very much WANT to get friends to buy this module, but if it ain't fun, they're not going to be buying it. 

I personally am loving the challenge and am having a blast. Playing on contention It requires you to keep your head a bit more out of the cockpit. and check with EWR for where contacts are, but then I'm also used to playing the MiG-21 and the F1CE a lot, where you can't rely heavily on the RWR. Regardless I still feel that it's doing decent right now in contention server, and that's even with both IFF and coop mode between the radar and IRST not working right now. I've certainly been able to get kills in it with both the R27R's and the R73 and they feel pretty satisfying. I feel not having a M2000 or F/A-18 level of RWR is not a deal breaker, and even if the front aspect portion of it was working with the radar on, I feel looking down all the time at it in the heat of combat is not the way to go. 

Edited 3 hours ago by CrazyGman

[Dragon1-1]

1 hour ago, Pavlin_33 said:

People seem to think that AWACS and GCI in the real world work like in DCS: an all seing eye that gives you an F10 view of the battlefield.

That's how it's supposed to work like. That not every controller lived up to that exacting standard IRL was sometimes a problem, but when following proper procedures it should indeed let the pilot create a mental map of the battlefield. 

Also worth noting, in Soviet aviation, GCI had more of a command role than in USAF, where AWACS is more of an advisory that the pilot can use or not. NATO pilots in general have a lot more freedom than Soviet ones did.

[Hodo]

On 9/18/2025 at 10:46 AM, falcon_120 said:

Let's say it's not an air superiority fighter by USAF standards.

Enviado desde mi RMX5011 mediante Tapatalk
 

Nothing the Soviets made is "by USAF standards"..... thats like saying a sailboat isnt to railway standards.  

Different doctrines entirely.   

[okopanja]

10 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

That's how it's supposed to work like. That not every controller lived up to that exacting standard IRL was sometimes a problem, but when following proper procedures it should indeed let the pilot create a mental map of the battlefield. 

Also worth noting, in Soviet aviation, GCI had more of a command role than in USAF, where AWACS is more of an advisory that the pilot can use or not. NATO pilots in general have a lot more freedom than Soviet ones did.

Yugoslav manual indicates GCI can sends 3 different commands in order to activate radar illumination AVT, PPS, ZPS. If this does not occur, pilot is expected to do it himself. 

Not sure what ED plans to do, but I do hope DL actually includes dedicated GCI seat with all available options for GCI officer.

Edited 2 hours ago by okopanja

[CrazyGman]

48 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

That's how it's supposed to work like. That not every controller lived up to that exacting standard IRL was sometimes a problem, but when following proper procedures it should indeed let the pilot create a mental map of the battlefield. 

Also worth noting, in Soviet aviation, GCI had more of a command role than in USAF, where AWACS is more of an advisory that the pilot can use or not. NATO pilots in general have a lot more freedom than Soviet ones did.

It worked well enough in Vietnam, of course it still was not a perfect system, and while the pilots did have to obey orders say to wave off, once they were in the thick of it it was pretty much up to them.

[Dragon1-1]

14 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

It worked well enough in Vietnam, of course it still was not a perfect system, and while the pilots did have to obey orders say to wave off, once they were in the thick of it it was pretty much up to them.

The US AWACS services were generally up to snuff. Other nations could be more... variable. Like with that story with the Brits, or how one South Korean AWACS guy seemed like he didn't know what "Judy" meant (their pilots apparently require talk-on right up until the merge), to great annoyance of the USAF F-15 driver who had to listen to his prattle, despite long having the bandit acquired on his own radar.

Edited 1 hour ago by Dragon1-1

[Harlikwin]

3 hours ago, primus_TR said:

Even when it works, SPO15 gives too many false and meaningless warnings. It is as useless as the SPO10 (the one used in the Mig21, Mi24) at this time. 

I mean thats probably the case, but it should work with the radar on at least in the MPRF/pursuit mode. 

[TotenDead]

1 час назад, Dragon1-1 сказал:

Also worth noting, in Soviet aviation, GCI had more of a command role than in USAF, where AWACS is more of an advisory that the pilot can use or not. NATO pilots in general have a lot more freedom than Soviet ones did.

A typical war day of a USAF fighter:

>AWACS: Good morning, Mr. Hunt. ... Your mission, should you choose to accept it, involves the "A, B, C"
>Fighter: Meh, I'm taking a sortie off
 

 

3 часа назад, primus_TR сказал:

Even when it works, SPO15 gives too many false and meaningless warnings. It is as useless as the SPO10 (the one used in the Mig21, Mi24) at this time. 

I believe the F-4E and  the F-14A players can elaborate here, their RWRs are of similar design, IIRC. Can those also be considered useless and are those blinded by radar?